[QUOTE=BloodRed;2962020]You live in gaga land.[/QUOTE]How're your Russian stocks doing?
Printable View
[QUOTE=BloodRed;2962020]You live in gaga land.[/QUOTE]How're your Russian stocks doing?
[QUOTE=ReinerOtto;2961625]Wow, I like that. Because it confirms, what lot of foreigners claim for a long time already: You can not trust the USA. You can not even trust written agreements, officially signed by the USA.[/QUOTE]I am an American, and I do not trust our government. I do not know why anyone else would either.
[QUOTE=JohnClayton;2961944]This is Russian propaganda, word for word. Ukraine is a sovereign nation with internationally recognized borders. Simply and truthfully, it was invaded by Russia in 2014 in a war of aggression in an act of pure territorial aggrandizement. NATO and the US did not foment this war; if anything, they did not resist it strongly enough in 2014 or 2022. The war would stop immediately if the RF withdrew behind the 1992 border, which they guaranteed by treaty in 1994.[/QUOTE]I know some well known and respected CIA liasons that claim otherwise. Just ask a simple question. How many baracks and US military bases exist *OUTSIDE* the US and where are they situated?
Putin's glorious DPRK allies have finally joined their Russian brothers in arms in doing what Russians do best: marauding, drinking and raping. But since they're currently deployed in Kursk, they've taken their fight to Russian civilians. That's only logical for there're not many Ukrainian Bandera Nazi scum in step-Mother Russia, right? But I digress.
[B]North Korean Soldiers Accused of Gang-Raping Russian Student During Training[/B]
[QUOTE]North Korean soldiers deployed to Russias Kursk region to participate in the Russia-Ukraine conflict were apprehended on November 12 on charges of gang-raping a local university student.
As part of the North Korean Military Adaptation Program, the victim was staying in the village of Kromsky Viki, approximately 15 kilometers (approximately 9.3 miles) from the combat zone in the Kursk region.
In an account shared on a Telegram channel reporting on the Ukraine war, she stated that I woke up in the middle of the night feeling suffocated. She continued that men speaking Korean taped my mouth, tied my hands, stripped me, and began beating and raping me, adding I was raped consecutively by four or five men. Their appearances were similar; she couldnt determine the exact number.
She recounted that after enduring two hours of abuse, she managed to escape while the soldiers were searching for vodka. She described the experience as unbearable and horrific, expressing uncertainty about how to continue living after such an ordeal.[/QUOTE][URL]https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/north-korean-soldiers-accused-of-gang-raping-russian-student-during-training/ar-AA1uvv8N[/URL]
[QUOTE=Argo1990;2962956]I know some well known and respected CIA liasons that claim otherwise. Just ask a simple question. How many baracks and US military bases exist *OUTSIDE* the US and where are they situated?[/QUOTE]Now I've officially seen everything.
Try harder next time.
[QUOTE=Xpartan;2962978]Putin's glorious DPRK allies have finally joined their Russian brothers in arms in doing what Russians do best: marauding, drinking and raping. But since they're currently deployed in Kursk, they've taken their fight to Russian civilians. That's only logical for there're not many Ukrainian Bandera Nazi scum in step-Mother Russia, right? But I digress.
[B]North Korean Soldiers Accused of Gang-Raping Russian Student During Training[/B]
[URL]https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/north-korean-soldiers-accused-of-gang-raping-russian-student-during-training/ar-AA1uvv8N[/URL][/QUOTE]Where is the evidence of North Korean troops in Kursk or any other place in Ukraine? A post by a Telegram channel isn't evidence, shit4 brains.
Following an update to the nuclear doctrine by Russia, there are two comprehensive cooperation agreements in the making, one with Iran and the second with Venezuela. The agreement with and Korea has been ratified and signed by both parties with the exchange of the ratified documents to follow. These have very clear messages indeed.
[B]'It's a slaughter': Video claiming to show North Korean soldier captured in Kursk emerges[/B]
[QUOTE]The video shows a man, presumed to be a North Korean soldier, lying in a hospital bed with bandages wrapped around his head and face, stained with blood and pus. His speech is hard to understand, but the video claims that he said in what did appear to be a North Korean accent that he was the only survivor of the Kursk engagement.
According to the video, the soldier stated that the Russian military deceived them, claiming the North Koreans would "build fortifications and guard the objects."
But they sent us on an assault in the Kursk region, without any reconnaissance or proper weapons to defend ourselves, he said.
He added, There were about 40 of us, but all are dead, I am left alone, I have nothing to lose. He described how shrapnel decapitated his comrades, and that he survived by hiding under their bodies.
"The Ukrainians killed everyone, the blame for their death lies with the Russian army and President Putin, he deceived our Great Leader, the sun-faced Kim Jong-un," he said, according to the subtitles.[/QUOTE][URL]https://koreajoongangdaily.joins.com/news/2024-11-01/national/northKorea/Its-a-slaughter-Video-claiming-to-show-North-Korean-soldier-captured-in-Kursk-emerges/2168699[/URL]
Below is the quote from the Ukrainian POV on the events of 2004:
On November 22nd a round date passed by without much notice - 20 years since the beginning of the first ("orange") Maidan in 2004.
Meanwhile, this event played a huge role in the history of Ukraine. In particular, it became one of the steps leading to the current bloody war.
Therefore, it is worth remembering what preceded the Maidan and what consequences it had.
The path to it began about 25 years ago. In the fall of 1999.
In the 90's, after the collapse of the USSR, the geopolitical landscape in the post-Soviet space was fundamentally different from what we see now.
Ukraine, as well as most other CIS countries, was then on the periphery of Washington's attention, which saw Yeltsin's Russia as its main partner and "stronghold" in the territory of the former Union.
However, gradually, more and more "alarm bells" sounded for the Americans that the Russian Federation was not going in the direction they would like.
One of these rang in 1999, when the Russian Federation did not support NATO's attack on Yugoslavia. In August, Yeltsin announced FSB chief Vladimir Putin as his successor. Putin promised to "whack" terrorists in the toilet, after the explosions of apartment buildings in Moscow in the fall of 1999, he started the second Chechen war, and quickly increased his rating. Washington viewed all these processes with great concern. And after Putin came to power, there were even more warning signs, and America came to the conclusion that "Russia had taken a wrong turn. ".
Accordingly, it became necessary to look for a new "support point" in the post-Soviet space, with the help of which, in addition, it would be possible to influence Russia, trying to return the Russian Federation to the "true path. " Or, at a minimum, not to allow it to grow stronger and start its own game with Europe, separate from the Americans.
Then, for the first time, a substantive and systemic interest in Ukraine at a high level awakened in the United States. Moreover, at that time, Zbigniew Brzezinski's theory was popular that "Russia will never become an empire again without Ukraine. " This theory was obviously false (within the 1991 borders, even without Ukraine and regardless of the nature of relations with Ukraine, the Russian Federation had every opportunity to develop and increase its power), but it played a major role in subsequent events, since it sharply exaggerated the geopolitical significance of Ukraine and, accordingly, pushed Russia and the West to fight for influence over it.
At the end of 1999, Leonid Kuchma, who was re-elected for his second presidential term, appointed the head of the National Bank, Viktor Yushchenko, as Prime Minister. According to a widespread version, he did this on the recommendation of the United States. Kuchma agreed with it, on the one hand, to get more favorable conditions for restructuring the external debt. And on the other hand, in order to generally improve relations with Washington, which, by that time, had become tense. Kuchma was increasingly accused of corruption, violation of human rights and freedoms, and election fraud.
Yushchenko solved the first problem (debt restructuring) quite quickly. But he made the second problem (the deterioration of Kuchma's relations with the West) worse.
The popularity of the new prime minister and his political weight in the country began to grow. And many began to view him as a future president. Including in the West. Accordingly, various questions to Kuchma began to arise more and more often in Washington. And the patronage of Western countries to Viktor Yushchenko became more and more obvious.
Kuchma soon recognized these signals and began preparing a sharp turnaround in the fall of 2000. In domestic policy, the resignation of the Yushchenko government. In foreign policy, rapprochement with the Russian Federation. That year, Kuchma met with Putin several times. And by early September, information appeared that they were discussing the creation of a joint consortium to manage Ukraine's gas transportation system.
However, an event occurred that ruined these plans: the tape scandal broke out, which became a powerful blow to the president. Protests began, supported by the West. And George Soros directly called on Kuchma to resign.
Kuchma held on to his post, Yushchenko's government was dismissed by the Verkhovna Rada, but the situation in the country was already radically different. Kuchma's power was wavering and he could no longer even think about running for a third term. And Yushchenko, on whom the West was openly counting, was perceived by an increasing number of people and representatives of the elite as the next president.
However, Kuchma and his inner circle did not consider Yushchenko as such. First, they tried to amend the Constitution in order to turn the president into a figurehead, and then, when this plan failed in April 2004, they agreed (largely out of necessity) to nominate the then prime minister, former governor of Donetsk Oblast, Viktor Yanukovych, for president.
The 2004 elections had long-term consequences. They were the first to test the technology of dividing voters into two hostile camps.
Yushchenko's political strategists talked about "Donetsk bandits", demonizing not only Yanukovych and his associates, but also all residents of Donbass.
Yanukovych's political strategists. About "fascists and Banderites" who "hate the southeast".
At the same time, a geopolitical line was built into the political technology. Who are you for, Russia or Europe?
The split created in this way led to natural consequences. A sharp increase in the confrontation in society, which resulted in the Maidan of Yushchenko's supporters (who did not recognize the declared victory of Yanukovych in the second round of the elections) and the threat of secession of the southeast from Ukraine, publicly declared at the congress of Yanukovych's supporters in Severodonetsk. External players. Russia and the West. Also actively joined the confrontation, helping the two competing camps.
Then everything worked out. The parties came to a compromise: Yushchenko was elected president in the third round, but the parliament adopted amendments to the Constitution, which reduced his powers.
It was already clear then that turning Ukraine into a field of geopolitical confrontation between the West and Russia and provoking by politicians hostility between residents of different regions was a mine of enormous power under Ukrainian statehood.
Ukraine had a choice of three strategic development paths.
The first was to take a clear course towards integration into Western institutions. The EU and NATO.
The second was to take a course towards integration with Russia, joining the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) and other organizations headed by Moscow, such as Kazakhstan or Belarus.
The third was to take a position of official neutrality.
The first two paths were practically impossible for Ukraine at that time without very large upheavals. Due to the opposition of geopolitical players and the split in society on these issues.
But the path of neutrality was real. Moreover, it suited the Ukrainian elites (who wanted to run the country themselves, not allowing either the West or Russia to reach the commanding heights in the economy and politics). This was the policy that Kuchma tried to pursue before the tape scandal. In general, this path was acceptable for society. But in order to follow it, both society and the elites had to be consolidated around this idea. Which implied a taboo on discussing the issue of geopolitical orientation in domestic politics (neutrality should not be questioned by anyone), as well as on any topics that would divide society.
However, the Ukrainian elites took a different, worse path. They perceived the political technology of dividing society as a very convenient method of managing voters, and at the same time as a very profitable way (as it seemed to them then) of flirting with the West and the Russian Federation in order to receive preferences from both sides.
The Ukrainian elites were divided into supposedly "pro-Russian" and supposedly "pro-European" political forces, which replaced each other in power. And sometimes simply ran from one camp to another.
A typical example is Petro Poroshenko, who in 2000, together with Azarov, became the founder of the Party of Regions, in 2001 bought the Lipetsk factory, and then joined Yushchenko's entourage, becoming one of the leaders of the Maidan. After Yanukovych came to power, Poroshenko supported the Kharkiv agreements on extending the stay of the Russian Black Sea Fleet in Crimea, became the Minister of Economy in the Azarov government, was friends with the Russian Ambassador to Ukraine Zurabov, attended a meeting of the Skovoroda club, which was held by the Russian TV presenter Dmitry Kiselev in the Kureni restaurant in Kiev. And in 2013, he again became one of the leaders of the Maidan.
Let us repeat that the Ukrainian elites in reality did not want to go either to the West or to Russia. They simply wanted to continue "milking" the country according to the principle "Texas should be robbed by Texans. " Earn money from economic ties with the Russian Federation and keep the money taken out of Ukraine in the West, while also receiving cheap loans from there.
This scheme worked for some time – while Russia's relations with the West were still relatively normal.
However, in 2010-2012 these relations became strained. Russia and the USA began to enter into a clinch.
Firstly, the 2008 crisis significantly changed the balance of power both in the world and in Europe. It hit the West the hardest, weakening it. At the same time, Russia (due to high energy prices), China and other countries of the global south (due to more efficient and competitive production) strengthened their positions. In addition, the moral authority of the United States in the world was undermined by the policy of the neoconservatives of the George W. Bush era and the war in Iraq.
As a result, Europe began to increasingly strengthen ties with Russia and China. First of all, economic (trade and mutual investments). But politics always follows economics. At that time, there were popular predictions about the creation of a "united Europe from Lisbon to Kamchatka" with the entry of Russia into the European Union, which would turn the EU into a powerful and self-sufficient geopolitical player, and Russia into one of its leaders (along with Germany and France).
Naturally, this was not a close and difficult prospect, but it did not seem completely fantastic at the time. Russia in 2013 was very different from Russia in 2024. It was not a democratic country, but it was not a harsh dictatorship either. It was a moderate authoritarian regime, under which Navalny could run for mayor of Moscow, taking second place, modernization according to European standards was taking place in many areas, people were getting used to paying taxes, the standard of living was rapidly growing, corruption was decreasing, and the quality of public administration was improving.
However, the option of an alliance between Russia and the EU was perceived by the Americans as a major threat. Accordingly, in the eyes of Washington, the role of Ukraine sharply increased. As a country where the interests of the European Union and the Russian Federation clashed, and the struggle for influence over which could destroy relations between Russia and Europe.
Secondly, Moscow intensified integration processes in the CIS by launching the Customs Union, which included Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan (Putin presented the see you as a way to strengthen the positions of post-Soviet countries before negotiations on an economic alliance with the EU). The Kremlin tried to lure Ukraine into the Customs Union, which the West did not want to allow.
Finally, a personal confrontation was added: the Americans opposed Putin's third presidential term. According to Russian critic Garry Kasparov, Biden directly told Putin during a visit to Moscow in March 2011 that he did not need to run for president again (Kasparov claims that Biden himself reported this conversation at a meeting with the Russian opposition, and no one has since refuted this fact). Putin did not listen and was re-elected in 2012. The US demand not to run and Putin's refusal to comply further strained relations between Moscow and Washington, moving them to a "personal" level. The Americans sought to punish Putin for his "disobedience" so that others would learn a lesson, and Putin wanted to show them that he was a "tough guy" with whom they should talk as equals, and not tell him what to do and what not to do.
Ukraine, perhaps, even in such conditions, still had a chance to avoid turning into a battlefield. A chance to leave the brewing conflict in the "geopolitical AWOL", taking an emphatically neutral position, trying not to exacerbate the contradictions between the Russian Federation and the EU in the Ukrainian direction, but on the contrary, trying to smooth them out, if possible. But for such a strategy, at a minimum, a consensus on this issue within Ukraine was necessary, which was nowhere near in sight. Yanukovych threw Tymoshenko in jail, and the opposition launched chants of "thank you to the residents of Donbass for the fruitcake president" into the people.
Finally, a fatal role was played by the fact that Yanukovych, not appreciating the danger for Ukraine and himself personally from the growing confrontation between the Russian Federation and the West, decided, out of habit, to make money on it by throwing coal into the furnace of geopolitical contradictions.
Although initially Yanukovych pursued a very cautious policy. He signed the Kharkiv agreements with Russia on the Black Sea Fleet in exchange for a discount on gas. He also pushed through the Rada the law "On the principles of foreign and domestic policy", which established the non-aligned status of Ukraine. At the same time, he continued to develop relations with the West.
But by the end of 2010, world oil prices had risen sharply, and so had the price of gas for Ukraine. And Yanukovych began difficult negotiations with the Russian Federation about a new discount on gas. The Kremlin was ready to provide it, but only in exchange for joining the Customs Union, which Yanukovych did not want to join. Firstly, he did not intend to share control over customs (which played a major role in corruption schemes) with any supranational bodies. On the other hand, he feared a harsh reaction from the West and the opposition.
That is why Yanukovych started looking for a way to get a discount on gas (as well as other preferences from the Russian Federation) without joining the Customs Union. And, as it seemed to him, he found such a way. To intensify negotiations on signing the Association Agreement with the EU, and then "sell" Putin the refusal to sign it. And to get everything he needed from Moscow without membership in the Customs Union. Formally, this plan was almost 100% successful. In November 2013, Ukraine suspended negotiations on signing the Agreement, and in December, Putin gave Ukraine a big discount on gas and a huge loan. And all this. Without joining the Customs Union. Using the resource he received, Yanukovych had the opportunity to raise salaries and pensions on the eve of the presidential elections scheduled for March 2015, and to win them.
That is, Yanukovych could have celebrated a grand geopolitical victory, but there was one nuance. By that time the Maidan was already raging.
In many ways, Yanukovych himself prepared it. Trying to "raise the stakes" in negotiations with Putin, he portrayed himself as an ardent Euro-integrator, and official propaganda presented the Association with the EU in much the same way as in Soviet times they talked about the coming onset of communism. This gave rise to great hopes among a significant part of the population ("we are about to join the EU! The West was already anticipating how he would "beat Putin".
And when suddenly, without much explanation, Yanukovych pressed the "stop" pedal, halting negotiations on the Association Agreement, this caused a storm both inside and outside the country. And the opposition and businessmen close to it saw in this storm a chance, by leading the Maidan, to remove the "Donetsk people" from power and to sit down in their place on corruption schemes.
Yanukovych made too sharp a turn, was unable to keep the situation under control and Maidan toppled him.
What happened next is well known (we wrote about this topic in detail here and here).
Subsequent events overshadowed what preceded them, including the Maidan of 2004.
But it is important to remember it in order to understand the origins of problems that did not begin in 2022 or even in 2014.
[QUOTE=Questner;2963153]Following an update to the nuclear doctrine by Russia, there are two comprehensive cooperation agreements in the making, one with Iran and the second with Venezuela. The agreement with and Korea has been ratified and signed by both parties with the exchange of the ratified documents to follow. These have very clear messages indeed.[/QUOTE]The very clear message is that over the last 30 years or so, the dumb shits in Washington, London, Paris, etc. fucked up. The West has made Russia into a pariah. If we had friendly relations, Russia would be trying to control nuclear proliferation instead. It's time to end the war and start to repair the damage.
[QUOTE=Questner;2963393]Below is the quote from the Ukrainian POV on the events of 2004:
Subsequent events overshadowed what preceded them, including the Maidan of 2004.
But it is important to remember it in order to understand the origins of problems that did not begin in 2022 or even in 2014.[/QUOTE]Putin propagandists always try to complicate things. The truth, on the other hand, is plain and simple.
First thing that's important to remember is that Putin invaded an independent country because it dared to choose its own path.
Second thing that's important to remember is that Putin's Russia today is a rotten to the core fascist state, with a regime that's in many ways more repressive than Mussolini's Italy of 1930's.
Third thing that's important to remember is that Putin is a mass murderer who has already murdered close to 1 million people, both Russians and Ukrainians.
That's it. The whole "origin of problems" is Putin himself plus some Russians' insane, atavistic nostalgia over their "great empire" (which has never been great to begin with).
[QUOTE=Xpartan;2963211][B]'It's a slaughter': Video claiming to show North Korean soldier captured in Kursk emerges[/B]
[URL]https://koreajoongangdaily.joins.com/news/2024-11-01/national/northKorea/Its-a-slaughter-Video-claiming-to-show-North-Korean-soldier-captured-in-Kursk-emerges/2168699[/URL][/QUOTE]Where is the video? Video 'claiming'. LOL. You imbecile.
There are however ex British soldiers in Kursk.
[URL]https://x.com/Megatron_ron/status/1860721377889628276/video/1[/URL]
[QUOTE=BloodRed;2963494]There are however ex British soldiers in Kursk.
[URL]https://x.com/Megatron_ron/status/1860721377889628276/video/1[/URL][/QUOTE]I feel bad for you having to maintain the official line. RUB / USD is about. 0096 today. From a monetary POV, if it falls below. 0085 it's over. My advice? Sell any Russian stocks and convert as many rubles as you can while you have time.
[QUOTE=Tiny12;2963412]The very clear message is that over the last 30 years or so, the dumb shits in Washington, London, Paris, etc. fucked up. The West has made Russia into a pariah. If we had friendly relations, Russia would be trying to control nuclear proliferation instead. It's time to end the war and start to repair the damage.[/QUOTE]The US nukes first of all should not be deployed in the Netherlands, Belgium, Turkiye, Italy and Germany as it contravenes the non-proliferation agreements, by the way.
As for a 'pariah' we don't feel it this way, it's just another example of a Western POV. In fact majority of countries by the number, population, territory etc are our friends.